If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article rIE3k.8112$lE3.5293@trnddc05, Jean-David Beyer wrote: Kentmere have this to say about development: "To maximise d. max, grade spacing and tonal rendition, a multicontrast chemical system such as Kentmere VC Select Plus Developer and Fixer, especially formulated to enhance variable contrast emulsions' characteristics, is recommended. Also recommended, in alphabetical order are Agfa Multicontrast, Champion B&W Multicontrast, Ilford Multigrade, Kodak Polymax, and Tetenal Variospeed developers, together with their appropriate fixers. Equivalent products from other manufacturers should give similar results. "We do not recommend conventional manual developers, which tend to inhibit both d. max and contrast." This is bizarre. Among other minor issues, Polymax paper developer -- as far as anyone seems to be able to tell -- *is* Ektaflo Type 1, which was basically liquid Dektol concentrate. I have had no trouble with the Kentmere paper in Dektol. I have also used Edwal Ultra Black with good results. Wanna see more bizarre? My quote, above, was from Kentmere's uk site. I have found their USA site, and the corresponding quote is: "To maximize d-max, grade spacing and tonal rendition standard developers such as Kodak Dektol, Clayton P20, Nacco Printol, Agfa Neutol Plus, Arista Premium Paper Developer, Ilford Multigrade Developer, etc. can be used." -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 11:35:02 up 16:12, 4 users, load average: 4.50, 4.37, 4.32 |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article _U93k.903$8q2.402@trnddc02, Jean-David Beyer wrote: Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote: I can only assume that as commercial production of photographic material and chemicals moves from the U.S. to "botique" producers overseas, it will get worse. While I was never a fan of VC paper, I think I will have to go with Ilford Multigrade IV as the least boutique of the manufacturers still in business. Harman (who own Ilford's wet photography product lines) bought Kentmere last year and claim they'll keep the Kentmere papers in production. The Kentmere multigrade paper is, in my opinion, a lot nicer than Ilford Multigrade. I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet. There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers. There were some complaints that do not concern me much, that seem to be complaints about curve shape, or difficulties with contrast control. These may be problems with lack of technique, or genuine artistic questions that can be resolved only by my testing under my conditions and with my objectives. On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me. 1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints. 2.) Some people got white film over the print. A.) Apparently someone actually got in touch with Kentmere and they said the dimensional stability problems could have been caused by overlong washing times. The O.P. had soaked them overnight. I used to to that with Ilfobrom and, while I never got wrinkling, I did get the emulsion falling off the paper. That was fixed by using wash times of 2 hours or less. Trouble is, the O.P. shortened his wash times and this did not fix the problem. B.) I never got white deposits (if that is what they were) on prints. I have a 5 micron filter at the output of my mixer that supplies water to my print washer. Now these all were posted in 2006, IIRC. So either there was no problem, but just bad processing, or else there was a problem and Kentmere fixed it. Some suggested that Kentmere had an old factory and could not manage proper quality control. But if I read their site correctly, they have installed more equipment for making paper, and pass ISO 9002 quality control standards and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters... -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 21:50:01 up 1 day, 2:27, 3 users, load average: 4.19, 4.18, 4.18 |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
In article 4B%3k.10856$kW2.6752@trnddc01,
Jean-David Beyer wrote: I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet. There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers. [...] On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me. 1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints. I flatten all my silver prints in a dry-mount press. I haven't had a problem with the Kentmere paper. This was the double-weight Fineprint VC? That's what I use. I use Perma Wash or Kodak HCA and wash for 30 minutes at 70F, plus another 30 minute wash after toning if I selenium tone (I mix the toner with PW/HCA). I see no benefit to prolonged wash times and they can take optical brighteners out of the paper in an uneven way and cause very unpredictable results, which I do *not* like. 2.) Some people got white film over the print. Again I haven't seen this. A yellowish-white film can result from inappropriate use of Ilford's film-strength, short-bath fixing method before selenium toning -- I used to see it with Elite. I wonder if that is what they were talking about. People used to the few papers with which Ilford's fixing method really works well would probably not be familiar with the results when it does not... -- Thor Lancelot Simon "My guess is that the minimal training typically provided would only have given the party in question multiple new and elaborate ways to do something incomprehensibly stupid and dangerous." -Rich Goldstone |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
pass ISO 9002 quality control standards and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters... Not much. ISO 9000 (there are several of them, genericly called ISO 9000) standards only as good as the company wants to be. They refer to a set of standards and practices that are written by the manufacturer to follow so that they can set and achieve a specific quality level. If they follow those standards or the level they set is worth anything is debatable. How well they are "tested" depends upon the company they hire to check that they have fullfiled their goals and followed their procedures. Some are extremely exacting and really do check, others just read reports and rubber stamp them. Certain countries are well known for avoiding certification issues, such as not reporting problems, "cooking the books" and changing a product the day after it is certified. This is very common with electronic items as CE cetification is carried out by the manufacturer and FCC certification is rarely, if ever, checked. IMHO it is likely that if Harman actually manufacturers its products in the UK they do follow their procedures and quality targets, and if the manufacturing is subcontracted out to China and India, those procedures and targets are ignored. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Jean-David Beyer wrote: pass ISO 9002 quality control standards and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters... Not much. ISO 9000 (there are several of them, genericly called ISO 9000) standards only as good as the company wants to be. They refer to a set of standards and practices that are written by the manufacturer to follow so that they can set and achieve a specific quality level. If they follow those standards or the level they set is worth anything is debatable. How well they are "tested" depends upon the company they hire to check that they have fullfiled their goals and followed their procedures. Some are extremely exacting and really do check, others just read reports and rubber stamp them. Certain countries are well known for avoiding certification issues, such as not reporting problems, "cooking the books" and changing a product the day after it is certified. This is very common with electronic items as CE cetification is carried out by the manufacturer and FCC certification is rarely, if ever, checked. IMHO it is likely that if Harman actually manufacturers its products in the UK they do follow their procedures and quality targets, and if the manufacturing is subcontracted out to China and India, those procedures and targets are ignored. My guess is that Kentmere do manufacture their stuff in the UK: http://www.kentmereusa.com/kt_main.php?p=ak This is not proof that they still manufacture their stuff in the UK, but it suggests it. I am surprised that they did not switch over from "festoon" production of their paper to continuous processing until 1970, but that is the English for you. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 08:00:01 up 1 day, 12:37, 4 users, load average: 4.14, 4.25, 4.21 |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
C41 rotary development
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
In article 4B%3k.10856$kW2.6752@trnddc01, Jean-David Beyer wrote: I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet. There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers. [...] On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me. 1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints. I flatten all my silver prints in a dry-mount press. I haven't had a problem with the Kentmere paper. This was the double-weight Fineprint VC? That's what I use. I use Perma Wash or Kodak HCA and wash for 30 minutes at 70F, plus another 30 minute wash after toning if I selenium tone (I mix the toner with PW/HCA). I see no benefit to prolonged wash times and they can take optical brighteners out of the paper in an uneven way and cause very unpredictable results, which I do *not* like. I wonder about my technique here. I use a Zone VI archival print washer that runs about 1/2 gallon a minute of water through it. I process prints one at a time (almost always), and after a 5-minute rinse in a washing sink after the (last) KHCA treatment, I drop the sheet into the print washer. I start timing that final rinse after the last print goes into the washer, so the first sheet in there may be there for several hours, but the last one is in there only one hour. The only time I had problems was when I left prints in there overnight, which was in the early 1970s with Ilfobrom. Never happened with any other paper, although I quit overnight soaks as soon as I saw Dr. Henry's tests of brightener washing out whenever his first (?) edition came out. But if Kentmere is especially sensitive to excess washing, I wonder if I should find some way to shorten the wet-time of the first prints. I do not print enough at a time to justify two print washers, but I do not trust the separators in the washer enough to just keep track of which print is which and remove each one an hour after I put it in. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 08:05:01 up 1 day, 12:42, 4 users, load average: 4.13, 4.15, 4.17 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bronica GS-1 rotary finder question | seog | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 0 | January 28th 06 02:59 AM |
b/w rotary processing - what works for you? | Ralf R. Radermacher | In The Darkroom | 8 | March 8th 05 02:20 AM |
New 400TX Rotary X's Too short | Indheatec | In The Darkroom | 3 | July 25th 04 01:00 AM |
Speed of a rotary tube processor | Manuel \(MrFloyd\) Portillo Pérez | In The Darkroom | 11 | June 18th 04 02:49 PM |